About your Search

20121213
20121213
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5
. >> sponsor is david chiu and from dpw we have david qwan >> my name is eleanor tapk and i am with the department of public works. our office received a major encroachment request from sia consulting on october 26, 2011. the request is to remove and reconstruction a portion of the city-owned maintaining wall to construct a concrete driveway ramp with transition slope to conform to the existing sidewalk grade in order to provide vehicle access to the property at 54 peralta. we have reviewed project, the project has been routed to city planning for them to review on the conformity to the general plan and we receive a letter from them in december 12, 2011, stating that the project conforms to the general plan. we also referred the project to transportation advicery staff committee for them to review and they approved the project on march 22nd, 2012. the project subsequently referred to our department, structural section, hydraulic section, and to the disability sf (inaudible) for their review and they approved the project. we conduct a public hearing on june 6 and the project w
dpw and cal train committed to incorporate landscaping to enhance both those projects. lastly, we have heard consistently from the community, the importance of incorporating a local job opportunities and contracting opportunities and so this funding request includes a request for developing an outreach strategy to go out and engage folks in the community so they can participate in the opportunities that will be available with both of these projects. given the work we've done and the community outreach, we are essentially, i think we kind of presented this conclusion or rather thinking on it initially but further work has essentially found that the option one, the berm option combined with the connector road really are not ideal are the best options we have in terms of maintaining that bridge with the funds we have in terms of facilitating a station and maintaining local access. and in terms of facilitating other land use activities in the area. those include the pc but go into a little more detail. we also included in this package of improvement and city project for the connector road
sounds like maybe dpw, we might have dropped the ball in terms of the noticing, if there's an error in reporting. i understand they got some special findings late in the game and in order for them to package it all up and bring to land use and complete the time lane that things were a little bit rushed. supervisor wiener, i don't think that's the normal standard of, from what i've seen working with dpw >> what i would say is the sponsor of the legislation is not here and neither is supervisor campos. my inclination would be, i would want them to weigh in on this, so my inclination would be to forward it to the board where they will be, they will always have the option to continue it or to send it back to committee. if they were here now we could ask them that, but that would be, that's one option that we would pursue. >> that's to forward to the board without recommendation. >> yeah, i could agree with that. i also want to go on record, our office spoke with supervisor campos who was in favor of this particular project but it's probably better that we hear it from him as opposed
costs up front after two years of paying my permit and paying in excess of 2,000, dpw informed me the police department committed an error. it was in violation of the municipal police code. dpw senior managers waived the nee on a new location but couldn't approve a refund. the claim was dean nied. michelle wu, the hearing officer, dpw, gave me the option to finish out the year at dolores park or choose a new location. many of the prime locations have been occupied over the years, and the new regulation doesn't require you to pay a $10,000 fee. do you think the city has given me back the money? and to this day, i still don't have a comparable location. mistakes happen and that's why i wasn't seeking additional damages. i just wanted the money back that i paid. i realize each of you are extremely busy. i know you have to choose which issues to get involved in. remember which issues you also ignore speak volumes of your character. i can only hope these things from a leader that you feel this is important in maintaining high ethics, that you see the importance of taking action for sma
of the transit center project. this is actually within that phase one project. we looking to meet with dpw the next main point of discussion how the environmental phase of that project will move forward. >> i just wanted to mention as far as the masonic, i think the district 11 definitely under serve as it relates to transit dollars. of course the bike rider in that particular part in district five it's very high. this has been one of those -- i think there should be more maybe conversation negotiation around some of this but certainly this has been one of the areas where bicyclist have been -- i know there have been two fatalities that i can think it. there does need to be attention given to providing a safer environment for bike pad purposes. you think that might be one of the reasons behind prioritizing this in the way that we have. it's part of obviously different picture. i wanted to make sure i put that out there. >> top two projects here, this is really unique project. it's in the middle of the park. it touches three different districts. actually in the prop double a program, we're
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5